See Roland Burris' terrifying death chamber: http://tinyurl.com/9z84g9
It might be more economical to build a nuke plant, use the nuke to generate electricity. Use that electricity to run a giant fan sitting right in front of the wind turbine. That way, the turbine can generate consistent wind power cheaply.
Hat tip FreeRepublic Post #4
That's the sound of someone with their fingers in their ears making noise so they don't have to listen to the person talking in front of them.
The list includes:
There's lots more but I think you get the point. If you still are having trouble figuring it out, here 'ya go - a picture is worth 1000 words.
(...) When one compares the GDP and total US Debt, you find a striking fact – there has been no actual GDP growth at all in the last eight years. In fact, you can go back through President Clinton's second term in office and you will find the same thing – the entirety of so-called "growth" since 1996 was in fact growth in debt, not GDP.
Once we understand the foundation of what has happened, we can then look at the basic facts surrounding our economy. These facts include:
(...) From this we find the foundation for solutions that are driven first by mathematical necessity, and then by maintenance and improvement of the public weal, both directly and indirectly. These are: (Click here to read solutions)
Should someone screw up at the wrong time it could hurt us all.
It is to remove barriers to success for everyone. To give all people back more of their money so they they have an equal opportunity to make a living or get rich. As momma said "If you didn't come with it and it wasn't clearly part of the deal then don't leave with it."By Jeff Dufour and Patrick Gavin
POSTED December 2, 2008 | 11:00 AM DC Examiner.com
The Capitol Visitors Center, which opened this morning, may have tripled its original budget and fallen years behind schedule, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid found a silver lining for members of Congress: tourists won't offend them with their B.O. anymore.
"My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway," said Reid in his remarks. "In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true."
But it's no longer going to be true, noted Reid, thanks to the air conditioned, indoor space.
And that's not all. "We have many bathrooms here, as you can see," Reid continued. "Souvenirs are available."
$621 million well spent.
"We have many bathrooms here, as you can see," Reid continued.
(Editorial comment inserted below)
It seems eligibility is in the news today. Via Instapundit, I read two articles, one at DailyKos and one at The Volokh conspiracy, regarding Hillary Clinton's eligibility to serve as Secretary of State for the Obama administration. My reading of the story online indicates the DailyKos blog came first.
The source of the issue is something called the Emoluments Clause, which is a clause in the Constitution that essentially states that, while a person is serving a term of office to which they were elected, he or she may not be appointed to any civil office which was newly created, or for which the compensation was increased in that same term. So because there was a pay raise given to the position of Secretary of State during Senator Clinton's current term, she is ineligible for appointment to this office. The wording: "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."
Rep. Mike Pitts, R-Greenwood, was the sponsor of the original bill. He said he got the idea after talking to the owners of a hunting outfitters shop in Clinton about the late summer sales tax holiday for back-to-school supplies and clothing. The store owners said they could use the stimulus, too. "It was to help dealers," Rep. Pitts says. "Another point was to bring recognition to the 2nd Amendment."
Kent Parsons, manager of Barron's Outfitters hunting and fishing store in Columbia, says the days after Thanksgiving are typically busy sales days anyway. He's hoping that even more people than usual will be buying shotguns and rifles from his store since they'll be sales tax free. Sales tax will still be charged on ammunition and accessories.
I'm still searching for the mythical creature that is the "financially conservative, socially liberal" politician. In virtually every case, the pro-abortion or pro-gay marriage politician is the first to vote against a tax cut, the first to vote for more spending and quick to compromise principles on any issue there is.Using the National Journal's ratings of Senators in 2007 , the correlation coefficient between "economic" scores and "social" scores is 90%. That means they almost always go together; financial conservatives are social conservatives and vice versa. Every Senator scoring above 60 in economic issues, scored above 50 in social ones. Every Senator scoring below 40 in economic issues, scored below 50 in social ones. If there is such an animal as a "financial conservative, social liberal", it does not exist in the US Senate.
Thought you might get a chuckle out of these ditties ... Big Rattler
-------------------------------------
1. A man comes into the ER and yells, 'My wife's going to have her baby in the cab!' I grabbed my stuff, rushed out to the cab, Lifted the lady's dress, and began to take off her underwear. Suddenly I noticed that there were several cabs ---and I was in the wrong one.
Submitted by Dr. Mark MacDonald, San Francisco
2. At the beginning of my shift I placed a stethoscope on an elderly and slightly deaf female patient's anterior chest wall. 'Big breaths,' I instructed. 'Yes, they used to be,' replied the patient.
Submitted by Dr. Richard Byrnes, Seattle , WA
3. One day I had to be the bearer of bad news when I told a wife that her husband had died of a massive myocardial infarct. Not more than five minutes later, I heard her reporting to the rest of the family that he had died of a 'massive internal fart.'
Submitted by Dr. Susan Steinberg, NYC, NY
4. During a patient's two week follow-up appointment with his cardiologist, he informed me, his doctor, that he was having trouble with one of his medications. 'Which one'? I asked. 'The patch, the Nurse told me to put on a new one every six hours and now I'm running out of places to put it!' I had him quickly undress and discovered what I hoped I wouldn't see. Yes, the man had over fifty patches on his body! Now, the instructions include removal of the old patch before applying a new one.
Submitted by Dr. Rebecca St. Clair, Norfolk , VA
5. While acquainting myself with a new elderly patient, I asked, 'How long have you been bedridden?' After a look of complete confusion she answered, "Why, not for about twenty years - when my husband was alive."
Submitted by Dr. Steven Swanson- Corvallis , OR
6. I was performing rounds at the hospital one morning and while checking up on a woman I asked, 'So how's your breakfast this morning?' 'It's very good, except for the Kentucky Jelly. I can't seem to get used to the taste' the patient replied. I then asked to see the jelly and the woman produced a foil packet labeled 'KY Jelly.'
Submitted by Dr. Leonard Kransdorf, Detroit , MI
7. A nurse was on duty in the Emergency Room when a young woman entered with purple hair styled into a punk rocker Mohawk, sporting a variety of tattoos, and wearing strange clothing. It was quickly determined that the patient had acute appendicitis, so she was scheduled for immediate surgery. When she was completely disrobed on the operating table, the staff noticed that her pubic hair had been dyed green, and above it there was a tattoo that read, 'Keep off the grass.' Once the surgery was completed, the surgeon wrote a short note on the patient's dressing, which said, 'Sorry, had to mow the lawn.'
Submitted by RN no name
AND FINALLY!!!................
8. As a new, young MD doing his residency in OB , I was quite embarrassed when performing female pelvic exams. To cover my embarrassment, I had unconsciously formed a habit of whistling softly. The middle-aged lady upon whom I was performing this exam suddenly burst out laughing and further embarrassing me. I looked up from my work and sheepishly said, 'I'm sorry. Was I tickling you?' She replied, 'No doctor, but the song you were whistling was, 'I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Wiener'.
Dr. wouldn't submit his name
Many folks seem to view the act or art of listening in much the same manner as some ancient religions or cults look upon the act of having their photograph taken, i.e., with trepidation if not extreme alarm. It is as if a portion of their (intellectual) soul is thereby being siphoned away, to be lost forever to some mystical, competitive or even hostile force.
In actual fact however, the genuine act of listening is not only not a loss of soul, it is not even passive. Listening can be seen as an overt act of seizing an opportunity together with another human consciousness to share a coped for awareness along a certain direction, or search for truth, with the goal in mind of welding TWO consciousnesses into one larger, more perfect consciousness or awareness. Thus light instead of heat, which is the only way possible to effect a new awareness.
So rather than a "giving up" or "yielding the floor" the act itself, of listening, is actually a gain. It is not merely a necessary requirement of communication with others in the only true sense of communication. It is the stance of learning itself. It should not be confused with the act of talking which our egos, being too eager, often mistake for communication. Unfortunately, for what might be termed radio-like broadcast communicating to be matched with one's "receiver" one must "tune in" with the other person on an oft-times difficult wave-length. One must be, or appear to be, genuinely eager to listen to or learn from the other person, if (repeat, if) that person is to be communicated with in the highest and best sense of the word.
This seems to me to be a necessary correlation one must make if one is to understand what Leonard Read has been trying to express (teach?) for so many years, that "the problem of restoring the American dream of freedom is not a teaching problem, as generally perceived by most all of us, but rather a learning problem." (Now then, that may well be the most radical suggestion you have ever hear, and an ever so true one when seen in this light. Agreed)
To use one of Leonard's phrases a step further: "Finding words for common sense" --- learning, in this sense, is not so very common, nor is it so easy as just running off super-enthusiastic verbalizing, however swiftly, voluminously and, or intensely sincere.
If the above makes an sense at all the act of listing perhaps should be defined as "learning", in which case, if this be true, listening may well be the most effectively overt: heretofore seeming to be that comforting or satisfying sensation accompanying only the talking-half of communicating or aggressive part of the act or the art of communicating.
It should not be seen as merely half of a two-way act. In fact, it may very well be the most important half, so to speak, of a one-way act.
All of which is not to say that those well-meaning, if misguided souls whose zeal, sincere and intense as they very well may be, have anything to do with the art of listening ─ in the above sense. All of us have experienced those missionaries from everywhere whose divine revelations on every subject in contention from alpha to omega motivates them to hesitate their torrent of words only to catch their breath for a mere hesitation in yours, so to begin their flood again. It is often as if the qualitative theory of inquiry in discourse had no beginning and the quantitative one no end… As frustrating and futile as such verbal exchanges always must be the act of listening can be looked upon as another dimension entirely, although even here it can sometimes actually offer the best response, if indeed one be indicated. This is because if such a desire is sought at all it need only be sought by one party --- if necessary.
Certainly, it is far better if both parties to the exchange be so inclined, but it is not necessary. (Perhaps the Lord also had in mind something akin to this when he offered his well known, if little understood: "turn the other cheek." One's ear isn't far from one's cheek, is it?) And anyway sometimes it is not convenient just to walk off. So what better way to devastate one's opponent, adversary or over-zealous discussant, than to listen him (or her) into submission?
An then, too, there's Leonard's ever so propitious allusion to listening: (if everything else fails this always works): "I make it policy not to talk to anyone unless he is trying to learn something from me, or I from him. You'd be surprised how much unnecessary, even unpleasant conversation such a policy cures."
Still, if listening be looked upon as an aggressive act it can be a truly great way to win a battle sometimes even the war in the competition of words ─ the place the violent wars usually begin. And as Leonard has pointed out "it's the man who strikes the SECOND blow who starts the fight." This is ever so true when one responds to a ridiculous assertion. Of course, one can always respond to a ridiculous assertion. Of course one can always respond by asking a question, but sometimes this seems to imply your seeming to be ignorant, it shouldn't, but if it does ─ try listening aggressively. Who knows, you might even learn something.
And if you do it with some real patience ─ and a smile ─ or maybe a grin, it may catch your opponent off guard, where upon, if you've done your homework, you can even defend your learning, which you probably got by listening ─ aggressively.
Signed -- Ralph Smeed
P.P.S. I wonder, my friend, so long as gov't is perceived as a "religion" more or less, doesn't it follow that it is futile (more or less) to "offer" or plead for less gov't., (i.e., as if asking God to do less)? Think about it --- and how to make the point, or even to speak openly about it, if we are perceived as in a kind of blasphemy.
"One of the best ways to persuade others is with your ears --- by listening with them." -- Dean Rusk
The uber alles (read: above all) liberal media, as usual, tried to bespeckle their dwindling audience before, during and now after the 2008 Idaho Republican Convention.
Norm Semanko defeated power-elitist incumbent J. Kirk Sullivan for the party chairmanship.
The media repeatedly illustrated the coalition which defeated the elite party apparatus as pot bong with a pro-life sticker on it. So much for the media's love affair with the political "process" especially when it comes to individuals who have come to a point in their walk-of-life where they actually understand the personal meaning of "freedom" and "liberty;" and, not the trite moral-less definitions propagandized in print and broadcast, like the freedom to "Larry Craig" and the freedom to dismember individual womb babies.
The political process, in this instance, has been completely ignored. The focus is on marijuana, not the historic fact that an individual fought and won at the Idaho Supreme Court – without the representation of a government licensed lawyer – for the individual constitutional right to "petition for redress" in the state of Idaho using the citizens' initiative, which had been illegally thwarted by local government commissars in Blaine County. The issue happened to relate to marijuana. Insert your pet issue here and see what is more important, pot or the process of protecting your right to fight for your beliefs.
Two headlines you could write: 1. Pothead Promoter Supports Semanko; 2. Individual Rights Advocate Backs Semanko. Now, substitute Obama for Semanko and guess which headline gets printed along side the Norman Rockwell masterpiece of the rugged American standing up at a town hall meeting.
Then add into the mixture the behind the scenes delegate manipulations exposed in part at the Ada County GOP Central Committee meeting where delegates were "pre-selected" before being overruled by the Grassroots GOP.
A full court press for Sullivan was deployed by fellow power-elitist like C.L. "Butch" Otter who reportedly said "He'd quit if Semanko was elected." It was a "joke" but would Idaho actually miss him as governor if voters gave him a pink slip?
Locally, statewide and nationally, the Republican brand no longer represents lower taxes, more individual freedom, family values and smaller government. It is liberal-lite with all the trappings of creeping socialism, like the trillion dollars National Prescription Drug Subsidy (Pill Bill) that Otter voted for.
Why would the Idaho GOP conventioneers vote to abolish the Federal Reserve to the hoorays of "Freedom!"? Those who understand personal freedom know that honest money is something that protects their freedom. Or, to put it another way, Nobel Laureate Milton Freidman asked, "If I stamp the word 'cheese' on a piece of paper, does it make it cheese?" So, what makes our printed money, money? Yet, we live, work, and struggle just to get a full shrink-wrapped pallet of printed paper that we can store in the bank.
Now, add ten more government monster buildings with a thousand more printing presses grinding out billions and billions of printed dollars everyday. How much will your pallet be worth? Ask your teenage grandkids if they have any idea how inflation happens. Surely the government schools taught them that prices go up because of greedy capitalists.
The power elitists don't actively care about the citizens' initiative process or the Federal Reserve, rather they care about pallets of money and using the power of government as a competitive advantage to possess more pallets believing that fulfills their "American Dream."
It is most important that Idaho Republicans re-engage the battle for the principles that made them strong in the first place. Electing Semanko is a first step. The convention delegate manipulations narrowed the media perception that Republicans want to self-sabotage their battle for principles by allowing Democrats to help them select their candidates for the general election, i.e., open vs. closed primaries.
Rush Limbaugh developed "Operation Chaos" in open primary states between Obama and Clinton urging Republicans to vote for Clinton thus extending their primary process. In Idaho and nationally, they are called RINO's meaning Republicans In Name Only. Democrats to a lesser extent label their crossovers as DINO's. In Arizona's past they labeled primary crossover Republicans as "Pintos."
Should the opposing team be able to select your team's quarterback? That is just silly. And for the independents who don't know if they are punched or bored, you get your chance in the general election to select your government representation.
Huge credit goes to former Senate Majority Leader Rod Beck for shepherding this most important principle through the power-elite's gauntlet-of-hell. Without his leadership, Semanko wouldn't have had a chance. Beck and his allies shaped the battlefield for Semanko; and any principled Republican who doesn't see this needs to recalibrate their political compass.
The power-elites know who beat them for the chairmanship … Rod Beck. You should hear the backroom gossip of the wanna-be elite gadflies. There are not into party unity, they are into power and the pallets of money and could care less about the Republican principles. They drove the Republican brand into Brand X. Their track record is soon to be complete after losing the US Senate, the House and now staring at the future President of the United States of America, Barak Obama.
The Idaho GOP has turned over a new leaf. It's morning in Idaho, again. Restore the Republican brand to its rightful principles by actually enacting into law legislation that reflects these timeless principles.
For too long, the Idaho Republican politicians have controlled the grassroots of the party and destroyed the brand. Now is the chance for the grassroots to again control the politicians. Isn't that the concept of "We the People," who simply loan a portion of our right to the politicians? Hence, restore the long-forgotten understanding that elected politicians are "public servants."
Power-elitist wanna-be's like Brad Hoaglun, big-time patronage government employee and Ada delegate, just won't let go. He's quoted post-convention in the Nampa paper saying, "People are fervent about their causes. It may be unmanageable at first, but it will become more so, over time."
So, over time we will be managed? Brad is clueless in his quest for elitism. We don't need to be managed, we just need a clear process to select representatives who share our principles without having to go through the GOP's elitist's gauntlet-of-hell every time we pursue principles. It is hard enough fighting off the universal health care of socialism without being slapped around by the bullies, like Sen. Bart Davis, within the GOP's big fat bloated government loving tent.
Davis tore up a copy of the GOP rules in front of the convention to show that he was "in control" of the show. More "management" from the elitists.
So this is party unity. The elitists lost and now they will punish the victors. Just you watch and see. Sabotage from the elitist will be relentless, after all, there are many pallets at stake here.
Good luck Norm Semanko. You will be successful if you put the grassroots first, and the politicians as public servants.
Finally, Norm … watch your back and don't chicken out under pressure. They can't beat you on principle.
The Republican Party’s governing body on Jan. 12th exercised its First Amendment Rights placing the Idaho Legislature in its proper role of public servants, not masters.
The court explained that the First Amendment associational rights at issue “belong solely to the association ... the Republican Party, not to any individual candidate or voter.”The plaintiffs (the Republican Party members who did not have standing to pursue the case) nevertheless were told by Judge Williams that the party’s First Amendment Rights belong “solely” to the party. That does not mean the Idaho Legislature has superiority to the party’s First Amendment Rights.
The court also noted that even if the state’s election laws violated the associational rules of the party, the party had the ability to define its own remedy.
For example, if the party had adopted a closed party primary rule while the state permitted a blanket primary, the party could voluntarily choose to participate in the blanket primary and adopt the results, or adopt rules deciding who the party’s nominees were following a blanket primary by counting only the votes of registered party members.
